Can assessment be both secure and inclusive?

Let’s cut to the chase early with the short answer. Yes. However, perhaps I am asking the wrong question here in my title.  

As we are all scrambling to redesign or just perhaps rethink assessment in response to generative AI and the implementation of UNSW's new Assessment and Progression Policy, much of the conversation has focused on secure assessment. How can we be confident that students are demonstrating their own learning?

Don’t get me wrong, this is an important question. But secure assessment alone is not enough. If an assessment is secure but prevents or disadvantages some students from demonstrating what they know, can we really trust what the resulting grade means?

Perhaps the real goal is not simply secure assessment, but designing assessment that provides trustworthy evidence of learning for every student. Achieving this requires both security and inclusion, not as competing priorities, but as complementary conditions for assuring learning.

Inclusive education is more than ELPs 

Sometimes, when people hear the term inclusive education, they think of adjustments provided through Equitable Learning Plans (ELPs). These adjustments are essential. They ensure students with disability can participate equitably in learning and assessment, and they remain an important part of an inclusive university.

But ELPs are only one part of inclusive education.

By their nature, ELPs are reactive, they respond to barriers that already exist. Students must seek support through Equitable Learning Services, identify themselves, disclose their disability and rely on adjustments being implemented consistently.

Inclusive education is also proactive; it’s about designing courses and assessments with as few barriers as possible from the outset. It is about recognising that learner variability is the norm, not the exception. 

Students differ in their backgrounds, experiences, strengths, identities, languages, abilities and ways of learning (the list could go on!). Rather than designing for an "average" student and making adjustments afterwards, we can design learning and assessment that anticipates this variability from the beginning. 

This is the thinking behind Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, 2024). UDL guides the design of learning and assessment through multiple means of engagement (supporting motivation and participation), representation (providing different ways for learners to access and understand information), and action and expression (offering varied ways for learners to demonstrate their learning).  

This is not about lowering standards or creating different expectations for different students. It is about designing assessment that removes unnecessary barriers so that more students have equitable opportunities to demonstrate achievement of the intended learning outcomes. 

What does this mean for secure assessment? 

In some cases, security has become associated with tighter controls, increased invigilation and more restrictive assessment conditions. While these approaches may reduce opportunities for misconduct, I believe assessment security is ultimately a design challenge rather than a question of increasing control. In some cases, increasing control can also introduce unnecessary barriers that make it harder for some students to demonstrate what they genuinely know and can do.  

Achieving trustworthy assessment requires us to think beyond the assessment event itself and consider how we can support students leading up to it. 

Students are more likely to demonstrate what they genuinely know and can do when assessment expectations are clear, opportunities to practise are built into the course, and formative feedback helps them develop confidence before undertaking a secure assessment.

This might include providing practice assessments that mirror the format of the final task, using formative activities to help students identify knowledge gaps, or offering accessible assessment briefs that clarify expectations. It can also include providing choice in topics, contexts or modes of expression where these align with learning outcomes, or designing assessment as a sequence of connected tasks (collecting pieces of evidence of learning) rather than a single high-stakes event. These strategies reduce unnecessary barriers while increasing confidence that students are demonstrating their own learning.

Assessment that requires students to apply knowledge, explain and defend their reasoning, exercise professional judgement, reflect on their decision making, or progressively develop their work over time is inherently more difficult to outsource and provides stronger evidence of learning. However, trustworthy assessment is about more than the design of individual assessment tasks. Taking a bird's eye view at the program level also changes the conversation. It enables program authorities to map where trustworthy evidence of learning is gathered across a degree alongside the assessment experiences students repeatedly encounter. Mapping both the evidence and the experience allows program authorities to strategically identify where secure evidence is most needed, how multiple pieces of evidence work together to assure learning, and how students can experience a balanced, inclusive and sustainable assessment journey. 

Moving the conversation forward 

As UNSW implements its new Assessment and Progression Policy, we have an opportunity to move beyond seeing secure assessment and inclusive assessment as separate conversations, or worse, competing priorities. Trustworthy assessment requires both. 

Security gives us confidence in authorship. Inclusion gives students equitable opportunities to demonstrate achievement of learning outcomes. When thoughtfully designed together, they allow us to place confidence not only in the assessment itself, but in what the resulting grade actually means.

Perhaps a better question for my title, and our future conversations, would be: How can we design assessment journeys where inclusion and security complement one another to provide trustworthy evidence of learning?